What specific courses or modules were added or removed from curricula after the removal?
Executive summary
The available reporting and guidance focus on broad, subject-level changes proposed in the UK’s 2025 Curriculum and Assessment Review — for example, the recommendation to scrap the EBacc, strengthen computing and digital literacy, add primary citizenship content, and make triple science more widely available — rather than publishing a definitive list of “specific courses or modules removed” from curricula [1] [2] [3]. Separate items in the search set show many institutions and platforms do remove or delete courses (e.g., Canvas content older than five years at Washington State University and UK universities cutting whole degree programmes), but these are local or administrative actions, not a single national “removal” with a published module-by-module list [4] [5].
1. What the Curriculum and Assessment Review actually signals — subject changes, not a module-by-module purge
The Curriculum and Assessment Review led by Professor Becky Francis sets out recommendations for subject-level reform: it proposes scrapping the English Baccalaureate measure, revising computing (with more focus on digital literacy and AI), expanding access to triple science at GCSE and reworking non-assessed PE, and introducing statutory primary citizenship content including media literacy and financial literacy [1] [2] [3]. Tes and Oak National Academy reporting emphasise subject-content additions and clarified expectations rather than the removal of a named list of individual courses or classroom modules [2] [3].
2. Government and sector coverage: reforms versus immediate deletions
Government and educational intermediaries frame the review as a modernisation programme that will change what is taught over time — new content, clarified progression and digital delivery — with a revised national curriculum due for publication in 2027 and implementation from September 2028, rather than immediate deletions of named modules [6] [7] [3]. Reporting highlights that many proposed changes are recommendations the government intends to adopt, and that details will be developed with teachers and subject experts [6].
3. Where the reporting does give explicit “adds” or “removes” at subject level
Analyses list concrete subject-level proposals: citizenship made statutory in primary (adding financial literacy, media literacy, climate/sustainability content) and adjustments to GCSE PE content and inspection of the activity list; computing to include more digital and data literacy and even AI throughout the curriculum [2] [8] [3]. Several outlets also report the high-profile recommendation to scrap the EBacc measure, a policy change that will affect uptake patterns across a range of GCSEs rather than removing specific syllabuses [1] [7].
4. Local/institutional course removals are separate and better documented
When you search for “courses removed” outside the national review, many examples are administrative or financial: Washington State University planned to delete Canvas course content older than five years, with the first deletion cycle removing Spring 2020 and earlier content — a technical record-retention action, not a curricular redesign [4]. UK universities facing financial pressure have announced scrapping entire degree courses or departments (e.g., archaeology, anthropology, some arts and social science programmes), but these are institution-level decisions driven by budgets and demand, and they differ from national curriculum reforms [5].
5. Where you won’t find module-level lists in current reporting
None of the provided sources publish a comprehensive list of individual modules or lessons “removed” nationwide after the Curriculum and Assessment Review; reporting describes subject changes, added statutory content, revised expectations and some assessment reforms, but not a named excision of specific modules or unit titles [2] [1] [3]. For institutional removals (course closures or platform content deletion), the documentation is operational and local rather than a national module sweep [4] [5].
6. Competing perspectives and implications
Proponents argue the review modernises learning and restores breadth — scrapping EBacc to encourage arts and broader GCSE choices and embedding life skills earlier [7] [1]. Critics and subject bodies caution the changes could be insufficient or delayed: the Royal Society welcomed stronger computing/digital focus but warned that an AI post-16 qualification would be too late without earlier data and maths literacy, and urged urgency on access to triple science and specialist teachers [8]. Institutional course cuts reported elsewhere raise equity and access concerns, but those are driven by finances rather than the national curriculum review [5].
7. What to watch next and how to get specifics
To find module- or unit-level additions/removals you will need the DfE’s final published curriculum documents and the subject-by-subject statutory programmes of study scheduled for publication (spring 2027) and subsequent exam board or university programme specifications; current reporting signals likely content directions but does not provide a granular module-by-module list [6] [3]. For local course deletions or platform removals, consult institution- or provider-specific notices (e.g., WSU Canvas retention policy, university programme closure statements) [4] [5].
If you want, I can track primary source publications (DfE statutory documents, exam board specifications) as they are released and extract any module-level additions/removals once those documents become available — current reporting does not include that granular list [3] [1].